Winnipeg Jets: My Expansion Team
by Hawerchuk on Sep 7, 2010 12:27 PM EDT
Email
PrintSBN conducted a mock expansion draft with me and James Mirtle as general managers. Not surprisingly, I took Winnipeg, and James took Quebec. Here's my team, with salaries:
| # | Player | Pos. | Previous Team | 10-11 | 11-12 | 12-13 | 13-14 |
| 1 | Colin White | D | New Jersey Devils | 3 | 3 | ||
| 4 | Josh Harding | G | Minnesota Wild | 1.2 | |||
| 5 | Michael Ryder | F | Boston Bruins | 4 | |||
| 8 | Radim Vrbata | F | Phoenix Coyotes | 3 | |||
| 9 | Roman Hamrlik | D | Montreal Canadiens | 5.5 | |||
| 11 | Dan Carcillo | F | Philadelphia Flyers | 1.075 | |||
| 14 | Vernon Fiddler | F | Phoenix Coyotes | 1.1 | |||
| 15 | Dave Steckel | F | Washington Capitals | 1.1 | 1.1 | 1.1 | |
| 18 | Adam Foote | D | Colorado Avalanche | 1 | |||
| 19 | Sean O'Donnell | D | Philadelphia Flyers | 1 | |||
| 22 | BJ Crombeen | F | St. Louis Blues | 0.885 | |||
| 23 | Jerrod Smithson | F | Nashville Predators | 0.75 | |||
| 26 | Shawn Horcoff | F | Edmonton Oilers | 6.5 | 6.5 | 6 | 4 |
| 27 | Mattias Ohlund | D | Tampa Bay Lightning | 4 | 5.5 | 5 | 3.75 |
| 30 | Erik Ersberg | G | Los Angeles Kings | 0.75 | |||
| 31 | Bruno Gervais | D | New York Islanders | 0.9 | |||
| 34 | Rob Niedermayer | F | Buffalo Sabres | 1.15 | |||
| 35 | Karlis Skrastins | D | Dallas Stars | 1.65 | |||
| 38 | Scott Nichol | F | San Jose Sharks | 0.76 | |||
| 39 | Brian Rolston | F | New Jersey Devils | 5 | 5 | ||
| 41 | Tim Jackman | F | Calgary Flames | 0.55 | 0.55 | ||
| 44 | John Scott | D | Chicago Blackhawks | 0.5 | 0.5 | ||
| 45 | Drew Miller | F | Detroit Red Wings | 0.65 | |||
| 48 | Rick Rypien | F | Vancouver Canucks | 0.55 | |||
| 49 | Sami Salo | D | Vancouver Canucks | 3.5 | |||
| 52 | Ryan Carter | F | Anaheim Ducks | 0.725 |
A few key notes:
- With the salary cap, expansion teams today won't be anywhere near as bad as expansion teams of the past. You can pretty easily show that a team that does nothing but spend to the cap by signing UFAs will be a playoff bubble team. So we shouldn't expect 29-game losing streaks from our two new entrants.
- There will be plenty of veterans with bad contracts left unprotected in the draft. Presumably Vancouver would have sent me a player or a draft pick in exchange for taking the injured Sami Salo off their hands.
- Cap management was very important to me. I'm still almost $10M under the cap for 2010-11 and I have just $22M allocated next season. There are plenty of NHL teams that are in much worse shape going forward, while this expansion team will have lots of flexibility. If you watched the Jets growing up like I did, you'll know Winnipeg fans are very patient in waiting for success, so I'll be able to dump a lot of these guys at the deadline for picks and prospects instead of chasing a first-round playoff exit.
- What was missing from the draft pool was anyone who might qualify as a good, young player. Josh Harding was probably the best RFA available, and with good reason - why would a team leave discount contracts unprotected?
- We were actually going to draft 30 players each, but by the time we got into the low-20s, there was nobody left worth drafting. I loaded up on a couple of fight-first players in Rick Rypien and John Scott and picked a player I know nothing about (Ryan Carter) to complete the draft.
- Defense is still undervalued by our SBN blog writers. From the players they left unprotected, I was able to assemble what I think is a solid defensive corps. I also picked up several good defensive forwards and two faceoff specialists in Dave 'Stecks' Steckel and Scott Nichol. My PP will probably suck though.
- James and I were nice enough to not collude or trade picks or players.
- I fully intended to draft Martin Biron, but I left it too long, and James closed out the Rangers
- Long Live the Winnipeg Jets!!!!
42 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I really can’t see this team as doing worse than Edmonton was last year. Since you say that you might stockpile picks/players, I went on the low side and 50-59.
Does anyone know, how do no-movement contracts affect expansion drafts? Not at all? Is it possible for a player to sign a contract with a “Must be protected in expansion drafts” clause?
A NMC would not affect an expansion draft. The league did not agree to the clause, the team did. The player cannot veto this type of move, either. Could they write it into a contract? I don’t see why not.
Hockey Wilderness
Assistant Editor:SBN Minnesota
Rule #17: You may not impersonate representatives of Hockey Wilderness and handout NHL themed wrist bands.
At that point most teams were eliminated. I told Travis I wanted to stop drafting but he demanded we continue. My last six picks are worthless.
Barch will beat them up.
Blogging on hockey at Globe on Hockey
by James Mirtle on Sep 8, 2010 12:53 AM EDT up reply actions
Salo
Presumably Vancouver would have sent me a player or a draft pick in exchange for taking the injured Sami Salo off their hands
But reports out there are saying that the injury could be season-ending, in which case the Canucks will likely want to keep Salo and use the associated LTI cap relief. Even if it’s not season-ending, the Canucks do have the option of not allowing him to join the team until they clear enough cap space elsewhere or the playoff starts (i think).
Looking at the lists of who was available, I’m pretty surprised that you burned your second pick on a goalie. Harding is only under contract for one year and then he’s UFA. It seems like a waste to go for a goalie so early with so many guys available, but I note that James did the same thing.
The two guys I was really surprised see selected were Horcoff and Ohlund. I would have thought that staying away from those long-term deals would have been a priority.
Finally, why didn’t you a) follow the rules and b) complain about that invalid Pittsburgh list (they should’ve left you guys a quality defender to choose from)? Your first 24 picks were supposed to be three goalies, eight defenders, and thirteen forwards. Were there just no goalies left for your 24th selection?
- I took Harding early because I figured James would want Zidlicky
- It was very hard to keep track of the rules. I had last year’s team for a couple of players and when I went to draft them, we’d already crossed those teams off the list
- By the time we hit our 20th pick, neither of us had any idea who to draft anymore…And then I had a power failure, so I just randomly picked a few guys and forgot to take a 3rd goalie!
Sounds like fun! (Power failures suck.)
I’m just not sure why you were so jacked for one year of Josh Harding. There were quite a few decent goalies hanging around, but very little in the way of real offensive talent. A question for you: were you guys allowed to pick 1 goalie + 1 defenseman from a single team, or was it 1 goalie or 1 defenseman?
by Scott Reynolds on Sep 7, 2010 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions
I should hope not! Like I said, very little offensive talent was available. Since you and James were competing, it seems odd, given that situation, to go for goalies early. That you could only take one goalie or one defender helps it to make sense since you could have teams disappearing fast, but there were still probably about eight or nine goalies available that you could use to start games when the draft began. Your second pick just seems awfully early to be taking one instead of, say, Vrbata or Bouchard.
by Scott Reynolds on Sep 7, 2010 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions
As for Ohlund and Horcoff, I hit the middle of the round, found myself with basically no PP and the possibility of not even making the salary floor. I have less long-term money allocated than every team except Phx and Nyi. Think I should have set a tougher target?
It’s not that you have a lot of bad money long-term, it’s that you took it on knowing that it was bad. I would assume that the teams signed those deals thinking that they were good value at the time. If you think they’re good today, then this is a different conversation, but if you think they’re bad, I’m not sure why you’d bother taking on length when there are other deals available to you.
by Scott Reynolds on Sep 7, 2010 5:24 PM EDT up reply actions
Presumably there’d be some room to maneuver with 32 GMs in the room. The Oil, if they knew what was good for them, would give me Horcoff and a couple of picks. Same for any number of other players.
Then I’d sign a couple of free agents and throw offer sheets around.
I’d also be out there mining the KHL and SEL. I think you could build a 95-point team and have no long-term debt on the books aside from that which you’d been compensated for.
Indeed, if the situation were different and you could get something for taking on Horcoff, Ohlund, Rolston, etc., then it might be worth it. I’m just surprised that, the situation being what it was, you took a couple of those guys anyway. But I guess everyone interprets the exercise a bit differently (i.e., “I’d probably take this guy and get something for him in a real draft, so I’ll take him now” vs. “I’m not getting anything for any of these guys, so I’m not taking any particularly burdensome deals”).
by Scott Reynolds on Sep 7, 2010 6:25 PM EDT up reply actions
Which guys making any kind of money have NMC/NTC?
Because I’m wondering why you’d take a guy team A exposed, since they view him as overpaid, if you could just wait until the draft is over and hopefully get that team to throw in a draft pick for taking him off your hands?
I’m impressed that you picked Colin White first overall and that you picked Brian Rolston overall. Despite what some Devils fans may feel, I know White’s quite a good defensive d-man at $3 million/year; but why did you snatch him with that first pick?
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
There wasn’t much forward depth, so I went after D first. I wasn’t sure who James was going to pick, so I was thinking either Jackman or White. I wanted a guy who played against top competition. They’re incredibly underrated.
This team is built from what I got to work with. There were a lot of shutdown D available, plus a lot of top 3rd liners. I loaded up on those guys. This will be a defense-first team.
How is the 7 game series going to be decided?
The post you linked indicates there will be a 7 game series between the two teams. How are the results from that going to be determined?
And if a 7 game series is the ultimate outcome, why did James take a goalie with both his 3rd and 4th picks? (I know you can’t speak for him, but damn)
I did some looking up on Hamrlik the other day to make a point about a trade proposal on Lowetide, and I remain stunned that he was left available. He was fantastic in a bad situation last year.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Must be that 5.5 cap number. He’s a good defenceman, but that seems a little bit rich, based on what the market value is for things that aren’t offence.
SNN Sports - A theoretical Oilers blog (i.e. theoretically, I write stuff there). Link now 100% less broken.
Yeah the main problem with Hamrlik is mostly the cap hit. Also, he gets a terrible rap from the Montreal media (what’s new??).
In actuality, he’s a key reason the Habs survived 4 months without Markov at the start of last year (by survived I mean, stay in the playoff race…). He’s been rock solid for the last 3 years and I expect the same this year. But age will catch up and somehow his early-career offensive numbers are just gone.
Spacek and Hamrlik took a lot of flak they didn’t really deserve.
Getting rid of Hamrlik’s cap hit to move the dollars elsewhere makes a certain amount of sense, but that requires having something available to fill that cap space with. At this point it’s not likely you could adequately fill 5.5 million (let alone 13 million, as the Habs also lost Gomez!) with deals that are better value than Hamrlik’s.
I wish Robert would come along and explain to us why he left Gomez and Hammer unprotected. Of course they’d both be grabbed in the top 10, and it’d leave Montreal a sorry hockey team indeed.
Presumably the draft would have been held early in the off-season, and they would have been able to sign free agents. Even so, it would have been tough to replace the production of Gomez and Hamrlik with what was available on the UFA market.
I think there would have been opportunity to replace Hamrlik, as there were a number of good D-men available. But Gomez would have been very tough, just like it was back when Montreal first traded for him. Ironically, the best UFA candidate to fill the role of a guy like Gomez would have been Plekanec.
Sorry but these Jets suck
They total 84.4 GVT, or 81.4 if you use Vukota projections. You need about 120 to be competitive. 36 goals short would drop you to the 60-69 range minimum.
And that’s adding up all your guys, not just the top 20, which is probably fair because you probably would need everyone if you added it up by ice-time.
That being said, the guys who came up with the list of players you could draft were obviously real dicks, I’m not sure anyone coulod have done better than this.
GVT systematically undervalues guys who go against top competition and face tough zone starts, does it not?
Doesn’t it also undervalue defensive contribution?
"Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful" George E.P. Box
by Knee high to a duck on Sep 9, 2010 6:41 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly. I did not draft a team that GVT would like.
Let’s say I assembled this crew:
Scuderi (4.6), Tallinder (6.6), Hejda (1.8), Colin White (4.4), Barret Jackman (5.5), Leopold (3.2), Zanon (3.7)
Harding as the starter (1.9), Biron (-5.5) as backup.
Then some forwards:
Goc (5.4), Pahlsson (-0.8), Malhotra (6.9), Pandolfo (-0.7), Moen (0.6), Kaleta (2.0), Madden (2.8), Pavelski (9.2), P. Bergeron (8.9), D. Brown (6.8), Zetterberg (13.3), Ponikarovsky (7.6)
I get 84 GVT.
That would be one of the best teams in the NHL.
I wasn’t trying to use GVT as the gospel, just wanted to at least say something objective to back me up.
If you really want to get into this though, you’re right that GVT doesn’t take competition or zone starts into account. In fact, it doesn’t take anything advanced, because it has the intention of being applicable to other leagues and eras where such stats are unavailable.
GVT weights defensive contributions equally to offensive (that is, preventing a goal = scoring a goal), is that undervalued? Perhaps you mean it undervalues defensive-minded players, and that may be true given that rating defense is perhaps more reliant on advanced statistics unavailable in other leagues or eras.
If we want to avail yourself of something more sophisticated we could use Alan Ryder’s PC – GVT’s closely-related cousin (both children of Point Allocations, I believe) – but it’s not readily available.
All things being equal, if we assembled a hundred teams with a GVT of 84, they’d generally wind up 20 points off the pace, but no – not all of them. Especially those hand-picked with the players upon whom more advanced statistics shine.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
